| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
20 Nov 2008 : Column 723W—continued
Human Trafficking: Children
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Government has considered the establishment of a system of guardianship for child victims of trafficking. [232949]
Jacqui Smith: The Home Department does not believe a system of guardianship for child victims of trafficking would offer any extra value beyond what is currently provided by local authorities. Local authority children’s services have a duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of all children including those that are thought to have been trafficked.
Following an assessment of a child’s circumstances and under section 20 of the Children Act 1989, a local authority has a duty to provide accommodation for them within its area if it considers that the child is in need of care. Using the powers in the Children Act 1989, where there is a risk to the life of the child or a likelihood of serious harm, the local authority or police are required to act quickly to secure the immediate safety of the child.
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what support system is in place for children who are victims of human trafficking. [232953]
Jacqui Smith: Under the Children Acts of 1989 and 2004, it is the responsibility of local authorities to safeguard and promote the welfare of any separated child who is assessed to be at risk of harm and in need of accommodation. As separated children at risk of harm, trafficked children become the responsibility of local authorities as looked-after children. They also have access to legal advice, education, and medical and psychological support. The Government’s White Paper “Care Matters” and Children and Young Persons Bill currently in Parliament contain additional measures to strengthen the service provision and improve outcomes for all looked-after children even further.
In England, local safeguarding children boards co-ordinate safeguarding activity for children at risk of harm. Some local and metropolitan authorities have already established trafficking sub-groups to promote best practice and co-operation between agencies.
On 7 December 2007, the Government published supplementary guidance “Working Together to Safeguard Children who may have been Trafficked” which actively guides practitioners towards making appropriate decisions for safeguarding children they suspect may have been trafficked.
Identity Cards: Biometrics
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions she has had with the police on the use of (a) non-unique digital representations of fingerprint biometrics and (b) unique pure biometric images obtained via the National Identity Card scheme. [219756]
Meg Hillier: The Identity and Passport Service holds regular discussions with the police on all aspects of the performance of biometric systems and their relevance for the operation of the national identity scheme, via the National Policing Improvement Agency.
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether workers employed in sensitive locations applying for identity cards from 2009 will be required to provide 10 fingerprints. [226403]
Jacqui Smith: It is intended that 10 plain fingerprint biometrics will be recorded and stored on the National Identity Register. The information to be recorded on the ID card will be prescribed in regulations to be approved by Parliament under section 6 of the Identity Cards Act 2006, but it is expected that two fingerprints will be recorded on the card.
Identity Cards: Data Protection
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the personal information collated before an individual's interview to enrol in the identity card scheme will be destroyed after use; and how and where the details of (a) the particular questions asked during the interview and (b) the answers given will be stored. [219766]
Meg Hillier: In some cases, individuals will be asked to attend an interview when they apply for registration on the National Identity Register or for a replacement card. While precise arrangements for the retention of personal information gathered for the purposes of the interview have not been finalised, we will seek to build upon existing practice for interviews of first time passport applicants, which is usually to destroy the information shortly after the interview.
Section 3(1) of the Identity Cards Act makes clear that information may be entered on the register, and once entered, may continue to be recorded there, only if and for so long as it is consistent with the statutory purposes for it to be recorded in the register. Any request for verification of information or provision of data made to the Identity and Passport Service will be dealt with in line with the provisions of the Identity Cards Act 2006 and the Data Protection Act 1998.
Identity Cards: Young People
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what work is being undertaken by her Department on whether identity cards should be extended to British citizens under the age of 16 years. [226402]
Jacqui Smith: Section 2(6) of the Identity Cards Act 2006 would allow the minimum age of 16 to be modified through secondary legislation, subject to approval by Parliament. However, there are currently no plans to extend the issue of identity cards to British citizens under the age of 16.
Illegal Immigrants: Prisoners
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average cost per day of detaining an immigration offender in the immigration estate was in the latest period for which figures are available. [234733]
Jacqui Smith: The estimated average cost of detaining an immigration offender in an immigration removal centre is £130 per day.
Interception Modernisation Programme
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what access local authorities will have to geodata from mobile telephone use under the Interception Modernisation Programme. [236500]
Mr. Coaker: Under the s21(4) (b)(c) Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, local authorities can only access service use and subscriber data. This does not include geo-data and there are no plans to change this.
Interception of Communications Commissioner
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what role the Interception of Communications Commissioner has in inspecting local authorities. [236589]
Mr. Coaker: The interception of communications commissioner is appointed by the Prime Minister under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) to exercise independent oversight both in relation to the interception of communications and access to communications data. In the discharge of his functions, the commissioner and his staff carry out a programme of inspection visits, reports and meetings. An annual report is laid before Parliament. Local authorities who make use of the provisions in RIPA to access communications data will be included in the commissioner’s inspection regime.
Local Authorities: Inspections
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which local authorities have been inspected by the Office of the Surveillance Commissioner in the last 12 months. [236587]
Mr. Coaker: In 2007-08, a total of 174 local authorities were inspected. The Office of Surveillance Commissioners does not publish details of which local authorities were inspected.
Local Authorities: Surveillance
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what guidance the Interception of Communications Commissioner has issued to local authorities on their use of powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2002. [236494]
Mr. Coaker: Representatives from the Interception of Communications Commissioner's Office are responsible for inspecting those local authorities which make use of communications data provisions within the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. They will provide guidance during these inspections and as appropriate at other times throughout the year, including in the information published in the Commissioner's Annual Report.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what response she has made to the Interception of Communications Commissioner on her proposals for local authorities to make greater use of their powers to intercept communications. [236496]
Mr. Coaker: Local authorities cannot intercept communications under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and there are no plans for them to do so.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many local authorities were authorised to intercept communications data in the last year for which figures are available according to records held by the Interception of Communications Commissioner. [236588]
Mr. Coaker:
Local authorities cannot intercept communications under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), but they can use the communications data provisions to make requests to communication service providers for service use and subscriber data under s21(4) (b)(c) of RIPA. The figures
published in the interception of communications commissioner’s annual report shows that 154 local authorities made use of their powers to acquire communications data in 2007.
Marriage
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what reason approval as a venue for a civil marriage ceremony may not be given to premises with a recent connection with any religion, religious practice or religious persuasion. [236516]
Meg Hillier: The Marriage Act 1949 draws a distinction between civil and religious marriages in England and Wales. The approval of premises for civil marriages is a matter for the local authority in which the premises are situated and it is the local authority which must be satisfied that the statutory requirements are met before it can grant an approval.
The statutory position on approved premises is contained in the Civil Partnership Act 2004 and the Marriages and Civil Partnerships (Approved Premises) Regulations 2005. The regulations state that the premises must not be religious premises as defined by section 6(2) of the 2004 Act. The Act defines religious premises as those which are used solely or mainly for religious purposes; or have been so used and have not subsequently been used solely or mainly for other purposes.
Therefore, if a premises which has previously been used for religious purposes has subsequently been used for another purpose then the previous use, by itself, should not prohibit the premises becoming approved for the solemnisation of civil marriages and civil partnerships.
Members: Correspondence
Sir Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she plans to respond to the letter to her dated 1 September from the right hon. Member for Manchester Gorton with regard to Mrs N. Akhtar. [225389]
Jacqui Smith: I replied to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton on 14 October 2008.
Sir Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she plans to answer the letter to her dated 25 September from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton in regard to Mrs Mohsin. [231854]
Jacqui Smith: I replied to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton on 3 November 2008.
Sir Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she will respond to the letter to her of 12 August from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton with regard to Faiz ur-Rasool. [235587]
Jacqui Smith: A reply to the right hon. Member was sent on 22 September 2008. As my right hon. Friend has not received my reply, a copy of the letter will be re-sent to his office.
Sir Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she will respond to the letter of 24 September from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton with regard to Mrs. F. Khan. [235588]
Jacqui Smith [holding answer 13 November 2008]: I replied to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton on 13 November 2008.
Office of the Surveillance Commissioner
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the annual cost to the public purse of the Office of the Surveillance Commissioner has been in each of the last three years. [236497]
Mr. Coaker: The relevant financial year figures are as follows:
| Financial year | Annual cost to the public purse (£) |
Police National Computer
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent representations she has received from the Data Protection Commissioner on the accuracy of criminal records held on the Police National Computer; and what estimate she has made of the (a) number and (b) percentage of criminal records held on the Police National Computer which contain significant inaccuracies or errors. [234447]
Any complaint about the accuracy of information held on the Police National Computer (PNC) would be dealt with locally by police forces. Each chief constable is a data controller and is responsible for the accuracy of information recorded by his or her force on the PNC. Police forces are required to have a quality assurance process in place to ensure that data entered onto the PNC are as accurate as possible.
Police: Databases
Mr. Illsley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of her Department's ability to implement the recommendations of the Bichard Inquiry on a Police National Intelligence database. [237248]
Mr. Coaker: The Police National Database (PND) is being delivered by the IMPACT Programme within the National Policing Improvement Agency. The Full Business Case for the PND is being closely scrutinised and covers, among other things, affordability and deliverability.
The Programme is subject to the Office of Government Commerce (OGC) Gateway reviews and will undergo a Gateway 3 (Investment Decision) review prior to the award of the contract. The purpose of a Gateway 3 review is to:
“investigate the full business case and the governance arrangements for the investment decision to confirm that the project is still required, affordable and achievable. The Review also checks that implementation plans are robust.”
The Programme submits regular reports on progress, plans, risks and issues including:
a monthly Home Office Project Monitoring System (ProMS) report;
a quarterly Government Major Projects and Programmes (MPP) report which goes to, among others, HM Treasury and the OGC; and
monthly reports and weekly updates to Ministers.
The Home Office is represented on the IMPACT Programme Board, which also regularly reviews progress, plans and the key risks and issues.
This is a challenging and complex programme which involves not just delivering new information technology, but also significant business change within the Police Service and considerable work for forces in preparing their data, infrastructure and other resources. However, the programme remains on track to commence deployment of PND capabilities in 2010.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |